Due to I received a book, The Bromeliad Lexicon by Werner Rauh.
There is a B/W illustration which show a pic of Dyckia cineria Mez,
that appear to look alike Dyckia marnier-lapostollei L.B. Smith

I doubt that if they would be synonym or just look similar in vegetative habit.
I guess that there should be a specimen of D.cineria in Heidelberg collection.
So, Timm, could you please give me any data on this topic ?
How different between both species, any key (English !) would be very appreciated.
In fact, I would like to see some pic of the ture D. cineria

I would like to meet new friends in other part of the world and would be glad to trade plants or seed from this part of the world.

I am sorry to tell you that this species Dyckia cinerea is completely
new to me. Neither do I know that book you mentionend, it does not
seem to be the english version of this one, which is the only one
of Rauh I know on bromeliads:

In this german book Dyckia cinerea is not mentioned.

######################################

The Original Description was published by Mez 1894 in
Flora Brasiliensis 3(3): 469.
In case you did not know, at Botanicus.org (Link)you can find a lot of those very old books scanned and
ready to download either as image or PDF file.
I have selected the part with the Original Description for you and uploaded it on my server.
Please let me know when you have finished the download, so can remove the file.

Copy and Paste this link into your browser
(direct linking does not seem to work with the forum code):

An english description is published in
Smith & Downs (1974) Flora Neotropica 14(1): 521

The Heidelberg Database does not list any specimen named Dyckia cinerea,
neither in the live plantscollection nor in the herbarium, no record at all.
At the moment I cannot trace back where Rauh got the plant from and
where it went.

Sorry, if I could not help you better with this one. But maybe we should try to contact Uncle Derek on this.

He reminded me that exactly this subject was discussed in an old BSI article (J.Brom Soc. 45: 117. 1995)

Harry E. Luther hat geschrieben:

When Can A Picture Be Trusted?

A recent comparison of Dyckia marnier-lapostollei with Dyckia cinerea made me think at first that it was a valid attempt based on the published work of authorities, but then I did a little research that I shall describe.The problems associated with cultivated Dyckia marnier-lapostollei and D. cinerea result from the condition that they are probably the same thing. Note that I say "cultivated." This is a horticultural identification problem and not a taxonomic problem in the strict sense.Real Dyckia cinerea is probably not in cultivation, at least in the United States, unless it has very recently come in as wild collections from Caraga or vicinity. I have not seen any. I have a photograph of the type specimen of D. cinerea (Glaziou 18570 at Berlin) that portrays a plant very different from D. marnier-lapostollei. The leaves are much longer, relatively narrower with much more laxly arranged, generally shorter spines. The scape is very much more robust; the inflorescence appears more densely flowered than any D. marnierlapostollei. The specimen is only a fragment but I suspect that the overall appearance of this species is quite different from D. marnier-lapostollei as well.So what's the problem? Why any confusion? To find out, look at the black and white photo in Dr. Werner Rauh's BROMELIADS, the 1979 English edition, or in the later, reprinted edition BROMELIAD LEXICON, between pages 290-291, illustration 252. See the Dyckia cinerea? Get our your pencil. It's really a Dyckia marnier-lapostollei. The identification was corrected in the later German edition of BROMELIEN but not brought to the attention of English-only readers.If there are any questions about "big" Dyckia marnier-lapostollei, consider the culture involved. The type specimen, which can be seen in the photos in the protologue, appears to be in a very small, perhaps four-inch pot. Most of us now grow these things with much more root room. Was the type specimen "bonsaied"? Are our robust specimens normal? Eight or so years ago, I saw a few freshly collected plants that were at least 50% larger than what was reported in the literature. I'm sure that size can vary somewhat so this characteristic should not be cause for undue suspicion.If any one has living material that he or she is sure is Dyckia cinerea let me know. I will be glad to try to verify it.

Science has committed many mistakes, errors and misunderstandings since it exists. Dyckias are a challenge to any skilled taxonomist and many mistakes have being commited in the name of the science. It seems clear that there was a kind of rush among toxonomists and a kind of conquest among the American, European and Brazilian ones. All in a hurry to classify , classify, classify. Rush is the enemy of perfection! Dyckias are known as having many faces and if one is in a hurry this one is bound to commit mistakes. Today Dyckias are cultivated for a long time before being named. Taxonomists around the world learned to be very cautions with these plants just ´cause such errors.
Dyckia cinerea ( grey or ash like color) is a green true species with just a hint of powdered silver dust on the leaves and has nothing do do with any other dyckia unless the fact that it is a Dyckia for sure. It bears broad leaves and, in the dark, even a beginer could tell them apart.The one show here as a D. cinerea is a polka doted zebra but not a Dyckia cinerea. Pictured Dyckias....we can state what they are not and never what they are unless it was you the one who knows. Written words are not that much trustable when the issue is Dyckia..........
I do not have this plant but when it will be the case I will send a picture. It is a pretty plant not as scaled or sivery as the marnier.
Cheers.